On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 11:08:01 +0100, Iljitsch van Beijnum said:
On 14 feb 2011, at 6:46, Frank Bulk wrote:
Requiring them to be on certain well known addresses is restrictive and creates an unnecessary digression from IPv4 practice. It's comments like this that raise the hair on admins' necks. At least mine.
I don't get this. Why spend cycles discovering a value that doesn't need to change?
You've obviously never had to change a number in a /etc/resolv.conf because the number you've listed has gone bat-guano insane. If the root DNS address becomes a magic IP address (presumably some variety of anycast), it becomes a lot harder to change to another address if the closest anycast address goes insane. If root nameserver F (or merely the anycast instance I can see) goes bonkers(*), I can say "screw this, ask G and K instead". You can't do that if G and K are the same magic address as F. (*) "bonkers" for whatever operational definition you want - wedged hardware, corrupted database, coercion by men with legal documents and firearms, whatever.